On Oct. 9, Judge April Perry ruled against the Trump administration’s deployment of National Guard troops to Chicago, citing that there was not substantial evidence of danger of rebellion. This decision was upheld by a federal court of appeals in Chicago this Thursday, allowing the National Guard to remain in Illinois but blocking their deployment in the city of Chicago.
This news comes in the wake of weeks of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids and violence against protestors, including tear gassing, pepper balls, protester arrests and a woman shot by Border Patrol in Brighton Park, Chicago, earlier this month.
The Trump administration has officially stated its reason for deploying National Guard troops as protecting ICE, Federal Protective Service (FPS) and other government personnel carrying out federal law, as well as protecting government property.
The Trump administration has argued that National Guard deployments are necessary to protect ICE operations as well as combat crime and demonstrations. For several weeks, Trump has proposed sending federal troops to Chicago, citing rampant crime that local officials are struggling to tackle, while Mayor Brandon Johnson has stated carjackings, murders and robberies are all down.
Attorney General of Illinois Kwame Rauol has, joined by the city of Chicago, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, asserting that the deployment of the national guard is unlawful under 10 U.S.C. § 12406, which permits federalization of a state’s National Guard only during times of invasion, rebellion or inability to enforce federal laws.
While the president upholds the deployment as lawful due to failure to enforce federal law in Chicago and danger of rebellion, Rauol argues that this is not the case, making the deployment unnecessary and unconstitutional. He stated that the presence of the National Guard would increase civil unrest and exacerbate existing tensions between civilians and law enforcement.
Speaking in support at a downtown courthouse where the lawsuit was reviewed on Oct. 9, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson stated, “It’s clear that this administration has demonstrated that it’s unwilling to work within the parameters of the Constitution. I believe that should be a concern for all of America.” Chicago residents have responded to the National Guard’s presence with staunch opposition, with hundreds taking to the streets to protest ICE raids and the National Guard.
U.S. District Judge April Perry ruled that the deployment be blocked until Oct. 23 in the Chicago area, citing it as unconstitutional in violation of the 10th Amendment, which grants powers not delegated to the federal government to states, and the 14th Amendment, ensuring due process. The three-judge panel from the seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the ruling, rejected Trump’s claim of rebellion in Chicago on the grounds that mere political resistance does not constitute insurrection.
Under normal circumstances, the president is restricted from using the military as a domestic police force, but Trump has threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act, allowing the president to deploy troops when a state is unable to combat an insurrection or is unable to enforce the laws of the United States.
Future court decisions regarding these deployments will have a profound impact on the power of the president to use the military to enforce federal law. The threat of deployment has intensified growing fears among Chicagoans who are already wary of ICE raids in majority Latino neighborhoods and reflects a growing adversarial attitude between the federal government and democratic states and cities, with repeated federal intervention against the will of local officials and residents.
